Hebdige

The brief introductory excerpt from Hebdige's larger "Subculture: The Meaning of Style" addresses British punk as a (then) contemporary example of an emergent youth movement, one combined of musical, racial, and social components. It begins by describing the unusual social climate of Britain in the summer of 1976 when punk emerged there; Hebdige continues by discussing different cultural factors that impacted the would-be punk generation. He makes sure to foreshadow his discussion of race and racial tensions during this time, as he cites its particular relevance to punk in contrast to the impact of more commonly discussed social institutions--the school, the media, the family, etc. Musically, Hebdige introduces the major influences to British punk (David Bowie, American punk) as well as its biggest icons (The Clash, The Sex Pistols), though does not yet at length discuss their specific contributions.

The immediate relevance of this excerpt is its thorough analysis of a youth subculture, widely disregarded for its fuck-all ethos, in a way that is both effective and explicative. He defines punk by its multiple sources of identity, citing aesthetic minutia as subcultural linchpins, (... because punk style contained distorted reflections of all the major post-war subcultures. [p26]) This focus is just one of many that illustrates punk as a complicated representation of inherent questions to youth subcultures: the definition of signs and symbols, the balance of politics and apathy, the sources of personal and collective identity, the granting of (sub)cultural authority.

However, even though Hebdige identifies sources of inertia for the punk movement in this excerpt, beyond this passage he fails to fully reconcile punk 'style' with its underlying ethos: self-identity in punk relies on the constant subversion/perversion of cultural symbols, including any of its own (sub)cultural symbols; thus, at the moment anything is considered to be 'punk', it must immediately be rejected as such for having that label. By as early as 1977, as punk trends infiltrated the mainstream, the punk thing to do was to not be punk. Because of this ironic notion of personal v. collective identity, I believe Hebdige's early analysis of the punk's roots is far more revealing to the true nature of youth subculture than any analysis of punk's fate, marked by cultural saturation and social misinterpretation.

Discussion question(s): how can a subculture, defined by youthful rebellion, withstand commercialization? Is this possible? Why or why not? Examples?